Elected leaders seek answers following ICE detention of five men in Dauphin County
Community members and elected leaders gathered at the Capitol in Harrisburg Tuesday to speak about the detention of five Dauphin County men by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Dauphin County Commission chair Justin Douglas said the Bhutanese Nepali residents were green card holders and legal permanent residents. He added it's unknown if any are being charged with crimes. Four of them, he said, have children.
'Five men – fathers, husbands, neighbors – are being taken from our community,' Douglas said. 'All of them have families. They work here, they pay taxes here, they raise their kids here. They are part of the fabric of this region, and now they are being detained and ripped away from everything and everyone they know. These are people our country made a promise to.'
A spokesperson for ICE did not respond to questions about why the arrests were made or whether there would be criminal charges filed. Since the start of the Trump administration, the agency has detained and begun deportation proceedings for multiple visa and green card holders, including those accused of no crimes or of non-violent ones years earlier.
ABC27, a Harrisburg television station reported one of the detainee's sisters said he came to America legally through a refugee program in 2012, and had had previous charges related to a fight in 2013.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
'Five individuals who have their family, who have their children, wives, parents here, [were] just picked up without reason,' said Tilak Niroula, chairperson of the Bhutanese Community in Harrisburg. 'These are permanent residents. We were forcefully evicted from Bhutan. We do not have a country. Deportation is not an option for Bhutanese Americans.'
The Dauphin County Bhutanese Nepali population is estimated around 47,000. Many are refugees or immigrants who fled ethnic cleansing and violence in their home country. Former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama both facilitated the legal resettlement of Bhutanese refugees into the country.
Democratic lawmakers raised concerns about both the ethics and legality of the arrests.
'It is an affront when we learn that folks with legal status were picked up by ICE and federal officials think that they can just send them back to Bhutan,' said Dauphin County state Sen. Patty Kim. 'They left because of ethnic cleansing. I'm embarrassed by the lack of knowledge and understanding by our federal officials.'
State Rep. Dave Madsen, a Democrat who also represents Dauphin County, agreed.
'This country, when we get scared or we get hard times, we often blame it on immigrants,' he said. 'Often when that happens, inhumane policies follow, like we just experienced in Dauphin County.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Rep. Justin Flemming (D-Dauphin) urged concerned Pennsylvanians to contact their elected federal officials. State government has little if any power over immigration laws and proceedings.
'Do not go overboard, but we need to make federal officials uncomfortable,' Fleming said. 'There is a process to go through, and this administration, this White House clearly has no respect for the rule of law.'
A spokesperson for Republican Rep. Scott Perry, who represents Dauphin County in the U.S. House, pointed to a Facebook post on the Congressman's page.
'I've contacted ICE about the details of these arrests over the weekend,' Perry wrote. 'When I receive more information, I'll provide an update as I'm able.'
Perry, who voted against certifying Pennsylvania's electoral votes for Joe Biden hours after a violent mob of supporters of then-President Donald Trump attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has been a strong supporter of Trump's stance on immigration in his second term.
Philadelphia Reps. Danilo Burgos and Joseph Hohenstein were also on hand for the press conference.
'The five people who sit in ICE detention right now are lawful permanent residents,' Hohenstein said. 'By definition, they did it the right way. And no one has said what, if anything, they did wrong.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
29 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
California Democrats Unveil Proposed Congressional Map to Counter Texas Redistricting
California Democratic lawmakers unveiled on Friday a proposed redrawn state congressional map they intend to place on the November ballot amid a redistricting battle with Texas. The proposed congressional map is expected to give Democrats five additional seats in the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2026 election, which Democratic lawmakers said was a response to Texas Republicans' redistricting plan.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Cuban-born biotech honcho enters NYC mayoral race seeking to upset Mamdani: ‘I hate socialism'
He's the anti-Mamdani. A Cuban-born biotech entrepreneur decided to make a longshot bid for NYC mayor because he loathes the radical left-wing ideas pushed by socialist frontrunner Zohran Mamdani — and saw just how dangerous they are in real life, he told The Post. 'I was raised in a socialist communist society, so I am the antithesis of Zohran Mamdani's ideology,' declared Joseph Hernandez. 'In fact, he's a motivator for me to fight in this race. I despise socialism. I am a believer in the American dream. I'm a believer in capitalism. It's not perfect, but it's lifted more people out of poverty than any other ideology,' he said. 3 Hernandez dismissed the notion his run for mayor would split votes between those seeking an alternative to the current frontrunner, socialist Zohran Mamdani Hernandez for NYC / Facebook Hernandez — a 52-year-old Upper East Side resident who immigrated to the U.S. at the age of seven with his family to escape Fidel Castro's communist rule — entered the race as an independent just over a month ago after collecting enough signatures to get on the November ballot. 'I doing this because I love the city and want to make it better,' Hernandez said. 'I don't have baggage like [many of the other candidates]. I'm a businessman; I'm logical; I know technology; and know how to structure budgets.' The registered Republican heads Manhattan-based healthcare and technology investment firm Blue Water Venture Partners If elected, he's vowed to hire 10,000 new cops along with other public safety improvements; convert unused office space into affordable housing and use artificial intelligence to improve city services. 3 Cuomo is a registered Democrat running for mayor of New York City as an independent. SARAH YENESEL/EPA/Shutterstock 3 Socialist Mamdani remains the candidate to beat in this year's race for City Hall. Stephen Yang for the New York Post The huge underdog joins a crowded field that besides Mamdani, the Democratic nominee, includes Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa, Mayor Eric Adams, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and defense lawyer Jim Walden. Adams and Cuomo are registered Dems running as independents; Walden is a registered Independent. Hernandez said he's raised roughly $300,000 since entering the campaign in late June and has already secured an endorsement from the Bodega and Small Business Group, which vehemently opposes Mamdani's proposal to create Soviet-style, city-run supermarkets. A Sienna poll this week showed Mamdani, the Democratic nominee, had 44% of the vote, following by former Gov. Andrew Cuomo with 25%, Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa with 12% and Mayor Eric Adams with 7%. The remaining 12% support another candidate or are undecided. Hernandez rejected the idea that he might be splitting votes even further among moderates and conservatives seeking an alternative to Mamdani– and thereby increasing the socialist's chances of winning. 'I'm doing this because I live in the city and I think it's so spinning out of control – and I think I'm the most qualified candidate,' he said. 'I'm a businessman, I'm logical, I know technology. And I know how to structure budgets.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Upset about DC's lack of voting rights? Look to the Democrats.
The deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C. has led to a media and political meltdown. In the New York Times, a column lamented that the military had not revolted against the civilian president. Even, so, commentators declared a ' coup ' because the federal government reasserted its constitutional power over the federal district. A Justice Department employee went so far as to scream profanities at federal officers on the street and assault one of them with a submarine sandwich. He was declared a 'freedom fighter' against 'the Gestapo.' The utter lunacy of the left was again triggered by Trump with an almost Pavlovian predictability. Trump rang the bell, and suddenly thousands of Democratic leaders began to salivate. In addition to denying a very real crime crisis in the district, Democrats immediately pivoted on the issue to renew unpopular demands for D.C. statehood. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, insisted that this was only happening because 'American citizens lack the protections of statehood.' Ankit Jain echoed that view. Jain occupies a farcical position as 'D.C. shadow senator,' an unpaid position in which he pretends to be a member of the U.S. Senate. Jain wrote that 'it's entirely possible that people will die as a result' of the deployment. He insisted that this would not occur in states where democracy governs: 'We may not have it in Washington, but if you live in any of the other 50 states, you do.' Over the years, I have testified five times in the House and Senate to argue for the restoration of full representation for residents in Washington, D.C. Residents could have a governor, two real U.S. senators, a voting representative in the House, a state legislature, and every other trapping of statehood. It needs only to go back whence it came. D.C. needs to return to Maryland through 'retrocession.' In academic writings, I have advocated for what I called ' modified retrocession ' where Maryland would take back the land given initially to create what was called 'the federal city.' The Framers did not want the capital under the control of any state, so they created the federal enclave to be under the control of Congress as a whole. Originally, the outlines of the federal city were laid out by none other than George Washington as the surveyor. It was a diamond shape, with territory ceded by both Virginia and Maryland. Within a few decades, Virginians in what is now Arlington County and Alexandria came to regret not having direct representatives and were allowed to retrocede back to their state. That left the triangle of territory from Maryland. However, Marylanders did not agree with their Virginian counterparts. They liked living in the federal enclave and decided to remain without direct representation. Congress previously allowed retrocession and could do so again. Under my prior proposal, the federal enclave would be reduced to the small sliver of land upon which our Capitol, Supreme Court, and the White House rest. It would finally give every Washington resident full representation. Also, in a city notoriously mismanaged for years, D.C. residents would be part of a state that excels in areas like education that could materially improve their positions. So if the lack of representation is so intolerable, why wouldn't Washington return to Maryland? It would give every Washington resident a voting representative in the U.S. House, two senators, a governor in a sovereign state, and a state legislature. The reason is politics at its most cynical and hypocritical. Democrats only want two senators representing D.C. if it boosts their numbers. It's not good enough to give them Maryland's senators. What's more, Maryland Democrats will not suffer a shift in the center of their state's political gravity from Baltimore to Washington. Finally, D.C. Democratic leaders are not eager to share power with Maryland Democrats, as they might gain all the trappings of a state. This is why, for decades, Democrats have settled to leave D.C. voters without direct representation in Congress. They decided it is better to lament the lack of representation on license plates than to give residents such representation through retrocession of the residential sections of D.C. to Maryland. Polling shows that most Americans still oppose statehood for this one city — a Vatican-like city-state. That is why Democrats are not keen on attempting a new constitutional amendment to change the status of the city. They would rather bewail the lack of direct representation while, ironically, trying to achieve effective statehood without a direct vote of citizens on a constitutional amendment. The fact is, Trump has every right to deploy the National Guard in Washington and to take over the D.C. police. Those are entirely lawful and constitutional orders. Yet the New York Times appears to have changed its position on the danger of insurrection. The Times recently ran a bizarre column by former Obama officials Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson, ' We Used to Think the Military Would Stand Up to Trump. We Were Wrong.' They complain that 'it now seems clear to us that the military will not rescue Americans from Mr. Trump's misuse of the nation's military capabilities.' The 'rescue' would have meant military personnel disobeying a direct order from the commander-in-chief because they disagreed with the need for the deployment. In fairness to the New York Times, that is not exactly an insurrection — it is more of a mutiny. What is striking about this debate is how entirely untethered it is from anything that touches upon reality. Statehood remains easily attainable for Washington, if Democrats would only stop opposing retrocession. Meanwhile, the deployment is clearly constitutional, regardless of how many columns or submarine sandwiches you throw about in another furious fit. The only thing that is clear is that Washington residents are again being played. They remain political props left stateless because returning them to full representation is not politically advantageous. They are given make-believe 'shadow senators' and protest license plates rather than restoring their prior status. As with the debate over crime, few want to discuss how to solve this problem. Given the opposition of the Democrats, Trump should take the lead and order federal officials to develop a blueprint for retrocession. He should use his office to fully inform the American people, and particularly D.C. residents, of the benefits of returning to Maryland.
